The
Kickstarter page for Shadowrun Returns has word from Harebrained
Schemes about their promise to provide a DRM-free version of the Shadowrun
revival, and how this will and will not conflict with their plans to offer a
version on Steam in addition to a standalone release. They explain that their
license agreement with Microsoft actually requires the game and its DLC to
include DRM, and while they managed to negotiate an exception to provide
DRM-free editions of the game and the Berlin Campaign reward DLC for their
backers, this will not apply to any other releases, so they will not be able to
sell the game on GOG.com or in any other DRM-free way, and all future DLC after
Berlin Campaign will be only release though Steam. So to sum this up:
Kickstarter backers of Shadowrun Returns are entitled to a DRM-free standalone
version of the game with editor and mod support (and future patches) as well as
a DRM-free copy of the reward DLC, but if they want to purchase future DLC after
that, they must install the Steam version (which is also included in their
backer rewards). Thanks nin.

Sho wrote on Apr 13, 2013, 15:24:Ok, let me clarify: I believe they should have publicized the details of their licensing agreement with Microsoft with regard to what it allows them to do and what it doesn't. I'm getting the impression that they did not do that, which feels rather cagey to me.

You don't think that's relevant info for a potential investor? Kickstarter isn't a shop. It's a funding round. Investors have broader stakes than getting a pre-defined set of goods.

While the details are still being worked out, we hate draconian DRM as much as the next guy. We expect there will be an account system but it would be primarily used to enable the social elements of the game like mission and character sharing--not to restrict access to the game itself.

Note the bold section. This was on their FAQ during the kickstarter, openly stating that the details of the DRM were still being worked out.

I can't find one single place they ever said they were releasing the final product without DRM. Only that the backers would receive DRM free versions. If you can find one, by all means, feel free to post it.

Xombie wrote on Apr 13, 2013, 21:04:But it isn't really investment. Paying a few bucks for a Kickstarter campaign doesn't mean you're on the board of directors, or get any actual input on the product beyond what they deign to listen to, unless that's what they promised you.

In fact, it's illegal by law to sell an investment position on Kickstarter unless all of the backers are qualified investors (which would likely rule out... everyone here - a qualified investor is one with phenomenal net worth).

Of course, that is true.... But if a Kickstarter does something fundamentally different to the funding page information then it's a simple violation of trust. And that's all a developer with no game under the belt has going for em.

Again, I don't much mind this, I just find it an curious thing to happen. Especially in this way. They should have come out on the first day of the KS and clearly stated this, that's all. Nobody would have a problem then....

Also for the record, this topic has blown up now just becuase of this silly DLC drm thing.. but becuase of this

Q: Are you planning on making corpses lootable?

A: Corpse looting involves a loot system and associated systems that interact with it. As much as we wanted one and designed one, we don't have the funding to implement it in this version of the game. If we'd done like the SNES and Sega games and gave you one PC/character class and no race choices to play, we might have had time for it. We invested in giving you ownership of your character, knowing that we could add things like that down the road if the game were successful.

Q: What will the save system be like?

A: We're planning a checkpoint system. No one on the team likes checkpoints better than save any time you want. But we're a small team with a LOT to do and save games are complicated. Thanks for understanding.

Steam is awesome. I own over 1000 games on the service. But it IS DRM. And while the devs are honoring the letter of their pledge to deliver a DRM-free version of the game, by requiring Steam for all future content updates they really aren't honoring the spirit of that pledge. No, it isn't fraud or anything close, but it is something worth bringing up, if for no other reason than to keep future kickstarter devs honest. The relationship between the kickstarter developer and the backers is built on a "good faith" relationship. When devs pick and choose what pertinent info about the development/licensing/production they are going to share with publishers (even about potential licensing deals like the one with Microsoft owning the license to the one they wished to make), they run the risk of damaging that relationship. It's a buyer beware situation, no doubt, but being coy and misleading about potentially unsavory tidbits of information is still not the way kickstarter devs should go about their business when asking backers to front them money based on nothing more than a name and a vision.

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.” - Mahatma Gandhi

"I understand you eRe4s3r. I personally do not think Steam is a big deal for DRM, I prefer all my games to be on Steam, but you are correct that the backers invested in a game made a pledge for a game that was promoted as being DRM-free FOR ALL and not just for backers (as rewards). It is poor that the MS agreement was kept hush.

So yes they lied. Those backers who backed this game to promote a DRM-free society... well, they really should be able to get a refund, this would send an even stronger (NO DRM!) message I would think.

You should probably send a clear message to Harebrained Schemes to voice your concerns at the least."

Don't you think they didn't know? They needed Kickstarter for the money to get their license and develop.

eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 13, 2013, 20:39:So you don't get why people who are investors and funding development of a game, might be a bit unhappy that this game is suddenly going the DRM route?

Maybe you don't get how Kickstarter works? Kickstarter pledges are investments, not purchases, rewards are REWARDS, not purchases. The pledgers likely pledged to make a DRM FREE game happen. Not just for themselves! That's what funding investment *means*.

Even if the devs are not to blame for what MS dictates... people are obviously going to be unhappy

Let's just hope that no other Kickstarter Project will pull a stunt like this.

I understand you eRe4s3r. I personally do not think Steam is a big deal for DRM, I prefer all my games to be on Steam, but you are correct that the backers invested in a game made a pledge for a game that was promoted as being DRM-free FOR ALL and not just for backers (as rewards). It is poor that the MS agreement was kept hush.

So yes they lied. Those backers who backed this game to promote a DRM-free society... well, they really should be able to get a refund, this would send an even stronger (NO DRM!) message I would think.

You should probably send a clear message to Harebrained Schemes to voice your concerns at the least.

Xombie wrote on Apr 13, 2013, 21:04:But it isn't really investment. Paying a few bucks for a Kickstarter campaign doesn't mean you're on the board of directors, or get any actual input on the product beyond what they deign to listen to, unless that's what they promised you.

In fact, it's illegal by law to sell an investment position on Kickstarter unless all of the backers are qualified investors (which would likely rule out... everyone here - a qualified investor is one with phenomenal net worth).

Maybe you don't get how Kickstarter works? Kickstarter pledges are investments, not purchases, rewards are REWARDS, not purchases. The pledgers likely pledged to make a DRM FREE game happen. Not just for themselves! That's what funding investment *means*.

But it isn't really investment. Paying a few bucks for a Kickstarter campaign doesn't mean you're on the board of directors, or get any actual input on the product beyond what they deign to listen to, unless that's what they promised you. What you get is what they promised you for your pledge level. They have no obligation to follow your motivations for pledging.

Kickstarter pledges aren't actually investors, they're customers that pre-pay for a product. You can complain about DRM as a customer, but their licensing contract takes precedence for obvious legal reasons.

I agree. Quit your bitching. Steam is not so bad anyway. The only problem with Steam is you can't sell or otherwise transfer your games.

You've got all of the game including one DLC and you will be up-to-date for a certain amount of time and you have the Steam key so you won't have to spend any more money than is required for the newer DLCs.

Nothing to really complain about. Be happy that you are entering the world of Shadowrun again. It might never have happened.

There was NO fraud or lies. The backers are getting EVERYTHING they were told they would get. No where however did they ever say you will also get access to any expansions or DLC post-release beyond Berlin. If you ASSUMED that then that is on you for making such a leap without anything to back it up, not them.

So you don't get why people who are investors and funding development of a game, might be a bit unhappy that this game is suddenly going the DRM route?

Maybe you don't get how Kickstarter works? Kickstarter pledges are investments, not purchases, rewards are REWARDS, not purchases. The pledgers likely pledged to make a DRM FREE game happen. Not just for themselves! That's what funding investment *means*.

Even if the devs are not to blame for what MS dictates... people are obviously going to be unhappy

Let's just hope that no other Kickstarter Project will pull a stunt like this.

killer_roach wrote on Apr 13, 2013, 17:10:But they own the rights to the IP for games ever since they bought out FASA Interactive after FASA Corporation's bankruptcy. (It means they also hold the rights to Crimson Skies still.)

FASA Corp did NOT go bankrupt, the owners chose to quit while they were ahead.

eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 13, 2013, 14:23:So why did they even need a Publisher and of all the Publishers MICROSOFT?? You can self-publish on Steam...............

Microsoft isn't publishing the game, but they own the rights to making Shadowrun games, so they needed a license agreement for this game.

Whoaw... I did not know that... how the heavens can a licensing agreement force you to use DRM? Well that's MS for ye...

Still this is borderline evil, if they did know this before they should have made this clear during kickstarting. And not months after with no way for recourse. Maybe they just don't understand what DRM Free version means. Backers were offered the GAME DRM FREE, not "A version of the game you can't buy any DLC for"

Mhh...

And you'll get the game DRM free. And the editor. And everything else the promised you. AND you'll get a Steam key.

What's the big fucking deal? And to Julio, how is it fraud? You get 100% of what you paid for. So future DLC is out of the picture. Most people bitch about there being DLC in the first place.

I swear, if everyone was given free blowjobs some of you folks would bitch about having to give up your Precious Bodily Fluids.

eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 13, 2013, 14:23:So why did they even need a Publisher and of all the Publishers MICROSOFT?? You can self-publish on Steam...............

Microsoft isn't publishing the game, but they own the rights to making Shadowrun games, so they needed a license agreement for this game.

Whoaw... I did not know that... how the heavens can a licensing agreement force you to use DRM? Well that's MS for ye...

Still this is borderline evil, if they did know this before they should have made this clear during kickstarting. And not months after with no way for recourse. Maybe they just don't understand what DRM Free version means. Backers were offered the GAME DRM FREE, not "A version of the game you can't buy any DLC for"

Mhh...

If you're playing it on Steam, you're behind DRM. I highly doubt they'll go the intrusive tages type of deal.

eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 13, 2013, 14:23:So why did they even need a Publisher and of all the Publishers MICROSOFT?? You can self-publish on Steam...............

Microsoft isn't publishing the game, but they own the rights to making Shadowrun games, so they needed a license agreement for this game.

Whoaw... I did not know that... how the heavens can a licensing agreement force you to use DRM? Well that's MS for ye...

Still this is borderline evil, if they did know this before they should have made this clear during kickstarting. And not months after with no way for recourse. Maybe they just don't understand what DRM Free version means. Backers were offered the GAME DRM FREE, not "A version of the game you can't buy any DLC for"